but behind in that they neglect providing for software that is payware, distributed on CD or from a commercial Website, for less expert users.
I'd be interested to hear about what you suggest need to be done to better provide for these types of software. Just stating that it need to be improved does not really explain what your problem is.
No, I wouldn't say that. Very much is just inertia, since many people have grown up (computer-wise or otherwise) with Windows, it is what they know and tend to stick to. Many of those that do not consider computers a hobby do not even know that there are other operating systems, or even the dividing line between the operating system (Windows) and the computer itself. This is my experience from dealing with computer-illiterate neighbours and other people that somehow heard that I was "into computers".
Ah, a car analogy. Reminds me of a very funny section in an essay called In the Beginning was the Command Line by Neal Stephenson. The entire essay is available (as a zipped text file) at http://www.cryptonomicon.com/beginning.html, and is a recommended read, at least the section called MGBs, TANKS, AND BATMOBILES. It is really funny. A short except:
Imagine a crossroads where four competing auto dealerships are situated. One of them (Microsoft) is much, much bigger than the others. It started out years ago selling three-speed bicycles (MS-DOS); these were not perfect, but they worked, and when they broke you could easily fix them.
There was a competing bicycle dealership next door (Apple) that one day began selling motorized vehicles--expensive but attractively styled cars with their innards hermetically sealed, so that how they worked was something of a mystery.
In fact MS has gone up recently - this is attributed to massive amounts of domain names added to Windows Live blogs.
In addition to the five million parked domains moved to IIS by GoDaddy.com after a timely contribution by Microsoft, who wanted the statistic to show to possible customers. "Yeah, IIS is on the rise, and Apache is falling. Join the new trend..."
Here's a message I think we can sell to moderately-skilled computer users: Dual-boot.
I think this is a very good idea. People must understand that Windows vs Linux is not an exclusive or situation, you can have both. And for those that don't feel like doing a real dual-boot install yet, there are at least two more alternatives:
Live distributions such as Knoppix.
The free (as in beer) VMware Player along with freely downloadable VMware appliances. These are virtual machines provided for free from VMwares website and contain working operating system installations.
There are many ways of trying Linux without making a complete switch.
If their OS's are so good, why are they always so concerned with Windows emulation?
A lot of software exists for Windows that isn't likely to be ported soon. Windows emulation enables non-Windows users to run them anyway.
And why are so few Windows users concerned with Lunix or OS X emulation?
Because open source software that originates on Linux have a tendency to become ported to Windows, while the reverse (closed source software that originates on Windows) does not exhibit the same trend. The closed source Windows programs requires involvement of the holder of the source code to be ported, while the open source Linux programs can be ported by anyone with experience in programming in both affected environments.
Some Wikipedia articles about Microsoft products already sound suspiciously similar to their sales pitches and advertising material, so this is probably already happening. It might not be Microsoft employees themselves, but the article authors must at least be big fans of Microsoft.
It was some time since I read those articles, so I don't remember specifically which one I reacted on. So no link, sorry.
To create a better balance of thrust in solid propellant... it is not uncommon for designers to shape the burn surface initially in the shape of a six pointed or eight pointed star...
I know. By the way, the star is eleven-pointed in the case of the space shuttle SRBs, even though I'm aware of that you probably meant the general case.
Unless they are the size of the 16 inch guns of the Iowa class battleships. And I mean the gun turret, not each barrel. If they were the size of a 16 inch gun barrel, you might be right, as the Iowa class mounts nine gun barrels.
My understanding is that solid rockets are relatively simple construction (compared to liquid) so they would be the best candidate for survial.
Just don't rely on the fuel to provide any structural integrity, as it is not really solid like a fireworks rocket. The SRBs used to launch the space shuttle are a good example of this. They have a void in the center of the rocket running through their entire length. This is because the fuel burns at the surface, and this configuration enlarges the surface by a large factor, providing considerably more power. So rather than burning from the end of the rocket, the fuel burns from the inside out.
That might be true. Some people might feel more important if the employer spends a lot of money on software for them. They won't care that this is actually taxpayer money, that they are morally required to put to their most effective use.
And some people certainly has the "you get what you pay for" attitude towards any software that is distributed free of charge. It has to cost money, preferably a lot, otherwise it cannot be good.
It once again made it clear that linux is not gnu so action had to be taken!
This discussion actually does not concern Linux, as it is licensed under GPLv2 only and changing the license might be quite hard. All kernel contributors would have to be contacted and approve of the license change. Thus, I cannot really understand your reply.
Has anyone actually talked to TiVo about this or only shouted at them from a distance as happened with Trolltech?
Remember that DRM is fundamentally incompatible with F/OSS. If you can modify the software, you can remove the DRM. Thus, DRM can only work with proprietary software.
That is actually the RIAA position on backup copies. They argue that backups are not necessary, since you can buy new copies at the nearest record store (at full price).
It is our view that we have to provide customers a rich experience so they can do what they want to do within their home. We don't expect them to make copies of HD DVDs for their friends. And we don't think customers want to do that either. So, DRM needs to give them some restrictions beyond what both the customer and we believe are the proper usage rules.
This is brilliant! They want to enable users to do what they want to do within their home. They don't expect them to make copies of HD DVDs for their friends, and they don't think customers want to do that either. So why do DRM need to give them some restrictions beyond what both the customer and we believe are the proper usage rules? Wouldn't it be enough for their DRM to restrict what they believe are improper usage rules?
I don't get how this could make sense. But of course, in their little world, logic may differ quite a bit from what we are used to.
Not to mention the next answer, a perfect example of making a bad thing sound good:
DRMs are becoming increasingly sophisticated and effective as a means of enabling consumers to access and use audiovisual content in a wider variety of ways that suit their tastes and habits. Watch out for the next generation of high definition discs, HD-DVD and Blu-ray, and content protection codes will be updated on a regular basis.
I'd say that the previous paragraph is also quote good:
Content owners use DRMs because it provides casual, honest users with guidelines for using and consuming content based on the usage rights that were acquired. Without the use of DRMs, honest consumers would have no guidelines and might eventually come to totally disregard copyright and therefore become a pirate, resulting in great harm to content creators.
So in essence, without DRM as a guideline, honest users will become pirates. What a load of crap.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd be interested to hear about what you suggest need to be done to better provide for these types of software. Just stating that it need to be improved does not really explain what your problem is.
You know, it is really intarwebs. :)
No, I wouldn't say that. Very much is just inertia, since many people have grown up (computer-wise or otherwise) with Windows, it is what they know and tend to stick to. Many of those that do not consider computers a hobby do not even know that there are other operating systems, or even the dividing line between the operating system (Windows) and the computer itself. This is my experience from dealing with computer-illiterate neighbours and other people that somehow heard that I was "into computers".
Ah, a car analogy. Reminds me of a very funny section in an essay called In the Beginning was the Command Line by Neal Stephenson. The entire essay is available (as a zipped text file) at http://www.cryptonomicon.com/beginning.html, and is a recommended read, at least the section called MGBs, TANKS, AND BATMOBILES. It is really funny. A short except:
Imagine a crossroads where four competing auto dealerships are situated. One of them (Microsoft) is much, much bigger than the others. It started out years ago selling three-speed bicycles (MS-DOS); these were not perfect, but they worked, and when they broke you could easily fix them.
There was a competing bicycle dealership next door (Apple) that one day began selling motorized vehicles--expensive but attractively styled cars with their innards hermetically sealed, so that how they worked was something of a mystery.
He was referring to the Slashdot crowd, Duh! They (We?) don't know what sex is (hint: porn is not real sex).
In addition to the five million parked domains moved to IIS by GoDaddy.com after a timely contribution by Microsoft, who wanted the statistic to show to possible customers. "Yeah, IIS is on the rise, and Apache is falling. Join the new trend..."
I think this is a very good idea. People must understand that Windows vs Linux is not an exclusive or situation, you can have both. And for those that don't feel like doing a real dual-boot install yet, there are at least two more alternatives:
There are many ways of trying Linux without making a complete switch.
It's the other way around, it's the Windows supporter (Steve Ballmer) that tosses the chair. :)
A lot of software exists for Windows that isn't likely to be ported soon. Windows emulation enables non-Windows users to run them anyway.
And why are so few Windows users concerned with Lunix or OS X emulation?Because open source software that originates on Linux have a tendency to become ported to Windows, while the reverse (closed source software that originates on Windows) does not exhibit the same trend. The closed source Windows programs requires involvement of the holder of the source code to be ported, while the open source Linux programs can be ported by anyone with experience in programming in both affected environments.
I guess administration means surfing for porn. Figuring out what is meant by development is left as an exercise for the reader. :)
Does it? From the website:
Dell's n Series desktop ships with a copy of FreeDosTM , an open-source operating system that is ready to install.Some Wikipedia articles about Microsoft products already sound suspiciously similar to their sales pitches and advertising material, so this is probably already happening. It might not be Microsoft employees themselves, but the article authors must at least be big fans of Microsoft.
It was some time since I read those articles, so I don't remember specifically which one I reacted on. So no link, sorry.
I know. By the way, the star is eleven-pointed in the case of the space shuttle SRBs, even though I'm aware of that you probably meant the general case.
Is that a lot? I think tank guns on main battle tanks have a muzzle velocity of about 1300 m/s.
Unless they are the size of the 16 inch guns of the Iowa class battleships. And I mean the gun turret, not each barrel. If they were the size of a 16 inch gun barrel, you might be right, as the Iowa class mounts nine gun barrels.
Just don't rely on the fuel to provide any structural integrity, as it is not really solid like a fireworks rocket. The SRBs used to launch the space shuttle are a good example of this. They have a void in the center of the rocket running through their entire length. This is because the fuel burns at the surface, and this configuration enlarges the surface by a large factor, providing considerably more power. So rather than burning from the end of the rocket, the fuel burns from the inside out.
That might be true. Some people might feel more important if the employer spends a lot of money on software for them. They won't care that this is actually taxpayer money, that they are morally required to put to their most effective use.
And some people certainly has the "you get what you pay for" attitude towards any software that is distributed free of charge. It has to cost money, preferably a lot, otherwise it cannot be good.
I hope that you're joking. If not, you might find more comfort in the Microsoft Get The Facts web site.
This discussion actually does not concern Linux, as it is licensed under GPLv2 only and changing the license might be quite hard. All kernel contributors would have to be contacted and approve of the license change. Thus, I cannot really understand your reply.
Has anyone actually talked to TiVo about this or only shouted at them from a distance as happened with Trolltech?That's a good point. I honestly don't know.
You are quite right, I don't. Why does that matter? I oppose their practice of using GPL software but closing it with DRM anyway.
Remember that DRM is fundamentally incompatible with F/OSS. If you can modify the software, you can remove the DRM. Thus, DRM can only work with proprietary software.
That is actually the RIAA position on backup copies. They argue that backups are not necessary, since you can buy new copies at the nearest record store (at full price).
This is brilliant! They want to enable users to do what they want to do within their home. They don't expect them to make copies of HD DVDs for their friends, and they don't think customers want to do that either. So why do DRM need to give them some restrictions beyond what both the customer and we believe are the proper usage rules? Wouldn't it be enough for their DRM to restrict what they believe are improper usage rules?
I don't get how this could make sense. But of course, in their little world, logic may differ quite a bit from what we are used to.
Not to mention the next answer, a perfect example of making a bad thing sound good:
DRMs are becoming increasingly sophisticated and effective as a means of enabling consumers to access and use audiovisual content in a wider variety of ways that suit their tastes and habits. Watch out for the next generation of high definition discs, HD-DVD and Blu-ray, and content protection codes will be updated on a regular basis.I'd say that the previous paragraph is also quote good:
Content owners use DRMs because it provides casual, honest users with guidelines for using and consuming content based on the usage rights that were acquired. Without the use of DRMs, honest consumers would have no guidelines and might eventually come to totally disregard copyright and therefore become a pirate, resulting in great harm to content creators.So in essence, without DRM as a guideline, honest users will become pirates. What a load of crap.